News
Call for papers: Volume 3 Issue 3 now open — Submit your manuscript OIJSEM is now indexed in Google Scholar and Crossref Early-online articles published weekly — View latest Average time to first decision: 14 days Call for papers: Volume 6 Issue 2 now open — Submit your manuscript OIJSEM is now indexed in Google Scholar and Crossref Early-online articles published weekly — View latest Average time to first decision: 14 days
Contact | Help | OPEN SCOPE
Full Text

Abstract

Abstract

Distance education has become increasingly prevalent, with multimedia delivery modes playing a significant role in shaping the learning experience. This research paper investigates the impact of various multimedia delivery modes on student engagement in distance education. Different hypotheses applied and SPSS analysis find out .Through a comprehensive literature review and empirical analysis, this study aims to explore how different multimedia delivery methods, such as video lectures, interactive simulations, and virtual reality environments, influence student engagement levels. The paper hypothesizes that certain multimedia delivery modes positively correlate with higher levels of student engagement, leading to enhanced learning outcomes in distance education settings.

References

  1. Brame CJ. (2016) Effective educational videos: Principles and guidelines for maximizing student learning from video content. CBE Life Sciences Education. 15(4): 6.

  2. Guo PJ, Kim J, Rubin R. (2014) How video production affects student engagement: An empirical study of MOOC videos. In Proceedings of the first ACM conference on Learning@ scale conference. 41-50.

  3. Talley CP, Scherer LA, Laffey JM. (2017) Video lecture formats and student learning: A preliminary study of teaching effectiveness in introductory biology. Journal of College Science Teaching. 46: 82-91.

  4. Kay RH. (2012) Exploring the use of video podcasts in education: A comprehensive review of the literature. Computers in Human Behavior. 28(3): 820-831.

  5. Heller-Ross H, Goodwin D. (2016) The effectiveness of an online laboratory report writing tool on enhancing students' learning experiences in a blended learning environment. Journal of Educational Technology & Society. 19(3): 299-312.

  6. Adams DM, Barker M, Bodner GM. (2018) Simulation in chemistry education: The state of the art. Journal of Chemical Education. 95(2): 199-210.

  7. Gobel S, Do QH, Zander TO, et al. (2017) Model-driven and data-driven strategies in educational technology research: A review of recent evidence. Educational Psychology Review. 29(2): 409-431.

  8. Suits A, Dwivedi A, Chang CH, et al. (2016) Effects of hands-on laboratory and simulation activities on student learning of neurophysiology concepts. Advances in Physiology Education. 40(3): 351-357.

  9. Zumbach J, Stürmer K. (2017) A literature review of empirical studies on learning with tangible technologies. Journal of Educational Technology & Society. 20(1): 136-149.

  10. Merchant Z, Goetz ET, Cifuentes L, et al. (2014) Effectiveness of virtual reality-based instruction on students' learning outcomes in K-12 and higher education: A meta-analysis. Computers & Education. 70: 29-40.

  11. Chuang TY, Lin YJ, Tseng YH. (2016) Exploring the effects of an augmented reality-based flip teaching approach on the learning motivation and perceptions of natural science students. Educational Technology & Society. 19(3): 508-520.

  12. Krokos E, Plaisant C, Varshney A. (2019) Virtual memory palaces: Immersion aids recall. Virtual Reality. 23(1): 1-17.

  13. Wu HK, Lee S WY, Chang HY, et al. (2017) Current status, opportunities and challenges of augmented reality in education. Computers & Education. 63: 41-49.

  14. De Freitas S, Oliver M. (2018) How can exploratory learning with games and simulations within the curriculum be most effectively evaluated? Computers & Education, 46(3): 251-258.